Social media platforms are facing growing legal scrutiny in the United States as regulators, school systems, and families press companies over the effects of app design on children and teenagers. That scrutiny is centered in federal court in California, where a coalition of state attorneys general has accused Meta of building Instagram and Facebook features that increase youth engagement while masking the risks. The latest major turn came as the multistate case advanced toward trial after judges declined to end it.
States say Meta kept harmful youth-engagement features in place
Meta is facing a consolidated lawsuit brought by attorneys general from 29 states, according to court filings in the Northern District of California dated June 29, 2026. The states say the company used design features on Instagram and Facebook that encouraged compulsive use by children and teens, while publicly minimizing the platforms’ mental and physical health risks. California Attorney General Rob Bonta said when the case was filed in October 2023 that the suit alleged Meta designed and deployed harmful features that addict children and teens.
The publicly released complaint says the states are seeking injunctive relief and other remedies, and it describes internal company decisions tied to features such as appearance-altering tools, time-spent controls, and Instagram’s multiple-account function. In a statement released in 2024, Bonta said the unredacted complaint showed how Meta’s leadership handled proposals involving youth safety features. Court records show the case survived key dismissal and summary judgment challenges, allowing the states’ claims to continue.
A June 2026 court filing said the evidence record contains numerous factual disputes, which is one reason the matter is still moving forward instead of being resolved before trial. That filing identified the 29 participating states, including California, New York, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Washington, Virginia, Wisconsin, and others. Meta has contested the claims in court, but the latest filings show the coalition’s case remains active.
The case is being heard in federal court in Northern California, but its practical reach is multistate because each attorney general is pursuing claims tied to residents in their own state. What is confirmed is the size of the coalition now pressing the case forward: 29 states were listed in the June 29, 2026 filing. What is not publicly detailed in that filing is a state-by-state breakdown of alleged harms, platform use, or any separate damages calculations for each state.
Earlier announcements around the case involved a larger bipartisan coalition of 33 attorneys general when the lawsuit was first filed on October 24, 2023. More recent court records tied to the consolidated complaint identify 29 state plaintiffs in the current posture of the case. Public court documents do not fully explain in plain-language press materials why that count changed, and no comprehensive public summary in the available filings breaks out the procedural status of each original state participant.
For residents, that means the case remains national in scope even though no local enforcement outcome has been finalized. There has been no final judgment, settlement, or court order requiring changes for users in any one state based on the June 2026 filing. The lawsuit instead remains a live test of whether state consumer-protection and youth-safety claims against a major social media company can succeed at trial.
The states’ core argument is that Meta’s business model depended on maximizing time and attention from young users, according to the complaint filed in federal court. The complaint says the company used powerful engagement tools and allegedly misled the public about the dangers those systems posed to minors. State attorneys general have tied that argument directly to the broader youth mental health crisis, saying social media design choices deserve legal scrutiny alongside content moderation debates.
That wider context matters because the Meta case is unfolding alongside other social media litigation and policy efforts around children’s online safety. California’s attorney general has separately linked the Meta and TikTok cases in public statements about protecting children online. Court coverage from other youth-harm cases has also shown judges increasingly willing to let at least some claims against large platforms proceed, even as the companies continue to assert legal defenses.
For families and residents, the immediate takeaway is procedural rather than practical: Instagram and Facebook remain available as the case continues, and no new nationwide operating rules have been imposed through this lawsuit so far. The next phase is likely to focus on evidence and trial preparation, after the court said material factual disputes remain unresolved. That leaves the case as one of the most significant ongoing legal challenges to how major social platforms are designed for young users.